naughtyrev:So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model. All in all it's not a bad idea. $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

TuteTibiImperes:naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model. All in all it's not a bad idea. $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

I steal HBO GO right now. I'd gladly pay them for it because I think people should be paid for creating content. I just really don't want to pay AT&T $100 a month and have to surf through 5,000 channels of Spanish and Jesus programming to see Game of Thrones.

They've always been considering it. They're using this model in some areas internationally (where they don't already have rebroadcasting agreements). It's always been that the cable companies are standing in the way, so if HBO can figure out a way to work with them, it might actually happen.

rugman11:Nadie_AZ: So they finally actually are considering this. About time.

They've always been considering it. They're using this model in some areas internationally (where they don't already have rebroadcasting agreements). It's always been that the cable companies are standing in the way, so if HBO can figure out a way to work with them, it might actually happen.

I am intrigued by what VICE will do on HBO now when that series starts. I imagine they'll leave their goofy, hit-or-miss counterculture stuff on their own site and focus on their news-doc, "let's send Shane Smith to some godforsaken place and hope he doesn't get killed" content.

FTFA: "But that $10-$15 per month figure thrown out by HBO is awful low. "

Low? No its not. That's about right. Netflix streaming is only about $8/month. Why would I pay more than twice that for a single channel's worth of programing? $10/month sounds pretty reasonable to me. Maybe $15/month if they start making more good shows, rather than just running movies.

Cymbal:rugman11: Nadie_AZ: So they finally actually are considering this. About time.

They've always been considering it. They're using this model in some areas internationally (where they don't already have rebroadcasting agreements). It's always been that the cable companies are standing in the way, so if HBO can figure out a way to work with them, it might actually happen.

True, but cable companies are already suffering. I have limited basic cable because we need the local channels and can't pick up the local channels even with an antenna (if its not the mountains killing our signal then its out apartment building), and have 10 meg internet service. Don't need a DVR thanks to Hulu. Netflix and Amazon provide enough movies to keep us satisfied. Time Warner could look at this as a way to make some extra money for those who don't want to spend a fortune getting a couple of hundred channels they don't want just to get HBO.

TuteTibiImperes:naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model. All in all it's not a bad idea. $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

That would actually be a bit much. NetFlix is less, has it's own original content AND tons of movies. Same with HuLu. Price needs to be less than $10/month, probably around the $5/month range if they only offer HBO Content.

Telos:TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model. All in all it's not a bad idea. $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

That would actually be a bit much. NetFlix is less, has it's own original content AND tons of movies. Same with HuLu. Price needs to be less than $10/month, probably around the $5/month range if they only offer HBO Content.

Not likely. Cable subscribers are already paying $15 or more a month.

A la carte tv programming is a much more complicated business model than most think. That's why I think we'll never get it, at least not in the form people usually think of when mentioning the topic.

AdolfOliverPanties:I didn't read the article but I'm sure this will piss off the cable companies.

I can't see why they'd go for this. Virtually everyone with an HBO subscription would ditch it for a plan like this, and many would probably ditch cable altogether. The cable companies would lose their shirts./That's not to say they don't deserve it, of course.

zobear:HBO could make a shiatton of money and people wouldn't steal Game of Thrones as much?

The first two seasons of Game of Thrones are already available right now as part of my Netflix DVD plan. Season Three will be out soon. Since I've got a couple hundred titles in my queue, I don't have a problem waiting a bit to watch it.

Cymbal:rugman11: Nadie_AZ: So they finally actually are considering this. About time.

They've always been considering it. They're using this model in some areas internationally (where they don't already have rebroadcasting agreements). It's always been that the cable companies are standing in the way, so if HBO can figure out a way to work with them, it might actually happen.

TuteTibiImperes:naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model. All in all it's not a bad idea. $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

If the service is the same as HBO GO -- all episodes of old shows and all movies in rotation available -- that's a huge amount of content outside of the new shows. It's also going to be years until Netflix offers the same number of original shows.

thornhill:TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model. All in all it's not a bad idea. $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

If the service is the same as HBO GO -- all episodes of old shows and all movies in rotation available -- that's a huge amount of content outside of the new shows. It's also going to be years until Netflix offers the same number of original shows.

And it'll take HBO years before they can offer this kind of service. At which point, Netflix's exclusive first run deal with Disney would've kicked into high gear.

I bet they could charge $10-15/mo per show and people would still subscribe to it. Maybe go with group rates too, or discounts for subscribing in 6 month blocks, 12 month blocks, etc. $14/mo gets you 1 show for that month(your choice), $22 for 2 shows, and $26 for unlimited shows. I think the people who only have cable for HBO shows would drop $26 in a heartbeat.

My cable company only allows access to HBO through a package that costs almost $40 per month. This would allow HBO to receive >$0 of my money, because fark that. There's little else I'd watch in that package so it functionally amounts to charging me the price of a movie ticket to see each episode of Game of Thrones.

No wonder these people make several orders of magnitude more money than the average American salary. It's not everyday that someone is smart enough to think up such a ridiculously unbelievable scheme like this. The thought had literally never occurred to myself or anyone else that this might be a good thing. Can we make these people president of the world? Imagine the problems they could solve.

RexTalionis:thornhill: TuteTibiImperes: naughtyrev: So basically they're saying, "we need people to pay us per episode for Game of Thrones"

Not per episode, they're looking at a monthly subscription model. All in all it's not a bad idea. $15 per month or so could net them a lot of subscribers, and it might encourage them to make sure they always have a hit series running instead of the current situation where there are sometimes several month droughts between when one ends and a new one begins.

If the service is the same as HBO GO -- all episodes of old shows and all movies in rotation available -- that's a huge amount of content outside of the new shows. It's also going to be years until Netflix offers the same number of original shows.

And it'll take HBO years before they can offer this kind of service. At which point, Netflix's exclusive first run deal with Disney would've kicked into high gear.

Why would it take years? The product, HBO GO, is finished. They've gone as far as making it available on tablets, smart phones, streaming devices like Roku, and gaming consoles -- so in other words, it has the same possible level of market penetration as Netflix and Amazon Prime.

I imagine that holdup is pricing and fear of cannibalizing home video sales. HBO spends hundreds of millions just to produce original content (not just TV shows, but movies and documentaries). They likely need to charge more than $10 a month, but feel that it cannot be substantially more than what Netflix and Amazon charge. Further, one of the ways HBO is able to turn a profit on their shows is through home video sales. Game of Thrones Season 1, for instance, did over $30 million in DVDs just in 2012 (so that doesn't include Blu-ray sales); it's hard to imagine that many people would keep buying HBO shows on home video when they're all available on demand via streaming.